Director of Public Prosecutions v Al-Fuaadi
[2024] VCC 1080
•5 July 2024
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-23-00851
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| MUSTAFA AL-FUAADI |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE RIDDELL | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 3 July 2024 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 5 July 2024 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Al-Fuaadi | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2024] VCC 1080 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence
Catchwords: Carjacking --- Plea of Guilty --- Criminal Damage of Police Vehicle --- Trafficking --- Possession of weapons --- Youthful offender
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic)
Cases Cited:R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 240 --- The Queen v Bugmy (2013) 249 CLR 571
Sentence: TES 2 Years 8 Months’ imprisonment
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr E. Fryar | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused | Mr S. Casey | Dib & Associates |
HER HONOUR:
1Mustafa Al-Fuaadi, on 7 August 2023 you pleaded guilty to one charge of carjacking, two charges of damaging property, one charge of possession of an unregistered Category A longarm, and two charges of a possession of a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine and cannabis L. On 3 July 2024, you pleaded guilty to another charge on the indictment of trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely 1-4 benzodiazepine, and a number of summary offences.
2These charges relate to two episodes of offending carried out by you between 17 and 19 October 2022, and include items found in searches of your bedroom and your car.
3You were 24 years old at the time of this offending and are now 26. Your victim of the carjacking was 62.
Summary of offending
4On 17 October 2022 at around 6pm, Leading Senior Constable Murphy and Leading Senior Constable McCarthy were standing beside their marked police car in Glenroy. They heard the noise of a car tyre being let down. You were observed standing next to the Police vehicle before you got into a nearby silver Toyota and drove away.
5After inspection of the Police vehicle, Leading Senior Constable Murphy found that the front and rear drive-side tyres had been slashed and as a result were deflated. (Charge 1 – Damaging Property)
6CCTV footage of this incident depicts you approaching the Police Vehicle with a satchel. A loud hissing sound was heard before you returned to the silver Toyota.
7About half an hour later on that same day, First Constable D’Amico and First Constable Kalisz returned to their marked Police vehicle in Broadmeadows. They were told by witnesses that a male person had exited a silver Toyota and was seen running up to the marked police car. That person was you.
8Upon inspection, the front and rear driver-side tyres of this second police vehicle were deflated with deep slash marks on each tyre. (Charge 2 – Damaging Property)
9The next day, on 18 October 2022, at approximately 11:50 am, 62 year old Rosella Reitano was driving her vehicle, a silver Mercedes, along Mickleham Road. You were driving the silver Toyota and collided into Ms Reitano’s vehicle, causing minor damage to the front driver-side.
10The vehicles came to a stop in the far left lanes on Mickleham Road and you exited the silver Toyota and approached Ms Reitano’s vehicle. Your demeanour was aggressive and intimidating.
11Ms Reitano also exited her vehicle and attempted to take a photo of the registration plate of the silver Toyota. It was at this point that you stood directly in front her and your aggressive demeanour caused her to believe you were going to assault her. Ms Reitano began screaming and you told her to, ‘Shut the fuck up and get out of here.’ Ms Reitano fled the scene and ran towards neighbouring houses on the east side of Mickleham Road.
12You then entered Ms Reitano’s silver Mercedes and drove north on Mickleham Road, abandoning the silver Toyota. At the time that you stole Ms Reitano’s vehicle, her YSL branded bag was in the silver Mercedes. This bag contained her credit cards, identification cards and her house keys.
13This conduct amounts to Charge 3 – Carjacking, Summary Charge 11 – Fail to Give Name and Address After Accident, and Summary Charge 15 – Drive Whilst Disqualified.
14Upon forensic analysis of the silver Toyota on 19 October 2022, a Ziploc bag containing crystal substance was located and seized (Charge 5 – Possess Drug of Dependence). Car rental information along with GPS and other data obtained from a location SIM in the vehicle led police to you.
15On 19 October 2022 at around 3:39 pm, police members attended your address and you were arrested.
16During a search of your premises police discovered Ziploc bags containing cannabis (Charge 7 – Possess Drug of Dependence), a small quantity of methylamphetamine (Charge 5 – Possess drug of Dependence), a machete in a leather sheath (Summary Charge 21 – Possess Prohibited Weapon), a Taser (Summary Charge 20 – Possess Prohibited Weapon) and shotgun shells (Summary Charge 22 – Possess ammunition without licence).
17In addition, police located a large quantity of prescription tablets that were later revealed to be 1,4-benzodiazapine, along with multiple empty Ziploc bags, a Gucci bag containing scales and Ziploc bags and a whiteboard ‘tick-list’ (Charge 6 – Trafficking in a Drug of Dependence).
18During your interview with police you were uncooperative and aggressive and refused to disclose passcodes to the two seized mobile phones (Summary Charge 23 – Fail to Comply with a direction).
Sentencing Principles
19This is a concerning spate of offending committed over several days.
20In sentencing you for it I must have regard to the principle of general deterrence. That is, the sentence I impose on you must generally deter other people from committing acts of violence and intimidation on other members of the public. It must deter people from inflicting damage on police property. It must deter people from trafficking and possession of drugs and weapons. It should send a message that such behaviour will result in imprisonment.
21Parliament has seen fit to enact legislation which is to the effect that imprisonment must result from any offence of carjacking unless an exception applies.[1] It was not suggested that there is an exception applicable in your case.
[1] S.5(2H) Sentencing Act1991 (Vic)
22The sentence I impose must also seek to enhance protection of the community and must denounce this type of reckless criminal behaviour on behalf of the community.
Objective Gravity
23I am required to assess the objective gravity of your offending and to determine where it sits on a scale of seriousness. I take into account the following aggravating features.
24Your victim was a 62-year-old lady. You are a young man. I accept the prosecution submission that in that way she was a soft target to you.
25Your driving had already caused a collision between your car and hers and no doubt she was already feeling upset or anxious as a result. Nonetheless you then took the opportunity to threaten her for the purpose of taking her car.
26There is no doubt that the offence, though brief, had a significant impact on her. Her victim impact statement, written in February of this year – so 15 months after the event – speaks to her ongoing trauma and anxiety because of your actions.
27Ms Reitano writes that she is afraid of driving and now only travels locally. She gets very anxious in the car and relies on other people to drive her.
28These type of incidents do not affect one aspect of a victim’s life, but tend to permeate many aspects of a victim’s life. To that end, Ms Reitano writes that your behaviour has affected her sleep and as such she is fatigued. It has affected her social activities, her confidence to go out. She was medicated still at the time of writing her victim impact statement and having ongoing sessions with her psychiatrist and psychologist and also requiring physiotherapy. I anticipate those appointments would also have had a financial impact on her as well as an interruption to her life at a practical level. She says simply but powerfully –‘ I am not the person I was before the accident.’
29As against those features I have also taken into account the following matters which serve to lessen the seriousness of that offence.
30First, it was not planned but was opportunistic, committed against the victim after a collision with her car.
31Second, at the time you demanded her car she was already outside of it and as such you did not force her out of the vehicle either verbally or physically.
32Third, it was in daylight and in a public place as opposed to the victim’s home where they may then feel hypervigilant about their private space, or fear of retaliation, and as opposed to a place where the victim may have felt isolated.
33Fourth, because the offending was spontaneous you were not disguised in any way.
34Fifth, you made verbal threat to the victim and she no doubt felt intimidated. No doubt in your drug affected state you were aggressive and frightening to her. Fortunately you did not physically assault her in any way or produce any weapon against her.
35Sixth, it was a fairly brief interaction.
36Taking into account that constellation of features and without in any way diminishing the frightening experience for Ms Reitano, I have concluded that the carjacking offence is a lower to mid-range example of that offence.
37The maximum penalty nonetheless is 15 years' imprisonment.
38In relation to the offending in Incident 1 involving the criminal damage by slashing the tyres of two separate police vehicles, that behaviour falls at the serious end of criminal damage offending. It is quite extraordinary. It is absolutely brazen, given police were standing directly outside one of the vehicles when you slashed two tyres. It speaks to a disrespect for their authority and you can offer no explanation for that behaviour.
39The raft of other offences is also somewhat serious.
40The trafficking charge relates to your possession of some 12,000 tablets of prescription benzodiazepine, your possession of a tick sheet and scales. Although I accept that there is no evidence of active trafficking before me, and therefore I cannot draw any conclusion with regard to how long you had been trafficking (noting this is a single date offence), how much you had trafficked or whether you received financial benefit, the circumstantial evidence speaks to a level of seriousness.
41Your refusal to give police access to your electronic devices raises question marks about whether there was likely to be evidence of any active trafficking thereon, though of course I can draw no conclusion in that regard.
42Your possession of a range of weapons is very concerning – a homemade rifle (though not made by you), a machete, and a taser. You had no lawful excuse for being in possession of those items. You report paranoia after being stabbed in the leg when you were 22 as a reason for carrying weapons. Although that offers some explanation, it is not an excuse at law.
43Your possession of weapons and of drugs is a potent combination. Taken with the series of offences committed over the course of these three days it speaks to someone who was out of control at that time.
44To understand your offending behaviours I will now turn to your background.
Personal history
45I have been assisted by the written submissions of Mr Casey on your behalf, along with a detailed psych report authored by Sam Albassit dated 27 May 2024, as well as by a discharge summary from Royal Melbourne Hospital and references from your family.
46You are the second oldest in a sibship of four, with two brothers and a sister. You were born and bred in Broadmeadows and have always lived with your family. Your mother, sister, brothers, brother-in-law and a cousin were all present in court at the time of your plea.
47Your parents separated when you were young, though your father remains living in a bungalow on the property. You reported to Mr Albassit that your father was a violent man in the context of alcohol consumption. You gave numerous examples of his aggression and physical violence towards your mother, and when not satisfied with his abuse of her how he would turn his anger to you. That included on one occasion after your sister’s arm was broken after she and you had been playing on the clothesline, your father then hit you with a metal pole until your arm was broken. Your father’s behaviour has been confirmed by your siblings, including confirmation of that specific incident and another occasion when the metal pole was held into a fire by your father before he then burnt your feet with it. I accept the submissions of Mr Casey that your siblings’ concern about reporting to him the behaviours of your father, lends to the credibility of your account. The impact of his behaviour is apparently ongoing in your family.
48You attended Broadmeadows Primary School and then Glenroy College, only completing Year 7 and part of Year 8. You report that your teachers suspected you had ADHD, but there was no formal assessment. Your behaviour at school was disruptive. You regularly got into trouble and became increasingly defiant and rebellious as you got older. You finally left school at 14 at the start of Year 9.
49You obtained work in odd jobs, doing painting and labouring and truck driving, however did not commit to those roles.
50You began associating with anti-social peers at around 17, becoming distant from your family, spending time away from the family home, and without employment. You had been a loner at school and so found in this new peer group acceptance. Along with it you were introduced to drug use. Casual use developed into daily use of a range of illicit substances including methylamphetamine, ketamine, MDMA, mushrooms and cocaine. Your drug use has dogged you since that time and is a feature of your offending here.
51In 2019 at age 22, you were at a Mosque and were stabbed in the leg. You were admitted to Royal Melbourne Hospital and required surgery, including a metal rod inserted into your leg. You required ongoing treatment and rehabilitation. You became hypervigilant following this attack, becoming paranoid and commenced carrying a knife on you as a way of protecting yourself. You were prescribed oxycodone and Xanax, which only added to the cocktail of substances you were consuming.
52On 8 July 2022 at age 24 you were involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. You were driving. You were alcohol-affected and driving at high speed, and after crashing into a barricade on the Tullamarine Freeway you were ejected through the front windscreen and thrown 50 metres. Your Glasgow Coma Score was three when initially attended to and only eight when you arrived at hospital.
53You suffered significant injuries, including fractures to your nose, lacerations to your scalp, including debridement to your forehead, along with hand and forearm abrasions, all of which required grafting.
54Most significantly you sustained a subarachnoid and subdural haemorrhage. You underwent brain surgery to relieve the bleeding on your brain. You suffered post-traumatic amnesia for 21 days and were then transferred to Epworth Hospital for rehabilitation. The discharge summary from Royal Melbourne Hospital confirms that on neuropsychological assessment you are diagnosed with a severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).
55On your recovery from amnesia however, you denied any significant memory or cognitive problems. You were given psychoeducation about traumatic brain injury and recommendations and referrals were made for the purpose of cognitive tests for your ongoing recovery. The recommendations included the need for medical clearance prior to driving, and an occupational therapy assessment. Recommendations were also made in relation to ceasing drug and alcohol use as part of your brain recovery.
56Despite your agreement to follow up, you discharged yourself against medical advice and before further tests could take place. You have not had the benefit of any follow up or treatment.
57According to your family there was a change in your behaviour following this incident, including social withdrawal, paranoia, and delusions and, significantly, an increase in heavy drug use. You describe yourself as living life “recklessly” and abusing drugs in the ensuing period.
58The offending before me occurred approximately three months after the car accident. You report being heavily substance affected. You report not having slept for days before this offending and that you have no memory of either the carjacking or the damage to the police cars. It was not suggested this was in any way related to your brain injury, but rather it was accepted that your lack of memory related to your significant drug abuse.
59You were interviewed for this offending by police and denied any involvement in it even after being shown CCTV footage and having details of GPS data outlined to you. You made admissions to the drug possession and weapons offences, although claimed that the benzodiazepines were for personal use. An independent third person was present for your interview. You became abusive to that person and to police.
60You were initially remanded before being granted bail in December 2022.
61During your initial remand your brother sought the help of a Mr Paul Watkins, who acts as an addiction counsellor. Mr Watkins says he is an addict in recovery since 2010 and that he has worked in the field of addiction/mental health in public hospitals and rehabilitation centres, mental health clinics in private and not for profit sectors. He has a Diploma from RMIT to be a Dual Diagnosis Case Manager and is the recipient of Australia Day award honours for his contribution to assisting Homeless Australia.
62Mr Watkins met you in custody and you and he spoke almost daily via Zoom or phone. You were released on bail in December and he then continued his contact with you, including face to face at your home. He states, and I accept, that the initial recovery from addiction is a stressful and fraught time. He said you displayed a genuine desire to change your life.
63Those sentiments are reflected in the references written by your family, who say this offending behaviour is out of character for the person they know.
64Unfortunately, Mr Watkins suffered his own relapse to drug use in December 2022 and this interrupted your relationship with him.
65It is apparent that your drug use continued and escalated to the point that in mid-2023 you were again offending. You have three outstanding matters in the Magistrates’ Court. They are awaiting the outcome of this sentence. The charges relate to contravention of bail, make threat to kill, criminal damage, reckless conduct endangering serious injury, driving offences and drug possession. As a result of your repeat offending you were ultimately remanded on 24 August 2023 with bail revoked on this matter.
66You have spent now 381 days in custody for this matter.
67Although your counsel in his written submissions relied on the principles enunciated by the Court of Appeal in R v Verdins[2], they were not pressed in oral argument. Mr Casey quite properly conceded that the overlay of drug use in your case is significant, and that any causal connection between your offending and mental impairment is impossible to disentangle from your serious drug use at the time of the offending before me.
[2] R v Verdins (2007) 16 VR 240
68Mr Albassit comments that your narrative of a detailed destructive pattern of substance dependence, in combination with what he describes as your significant psychiatric and psychological impairments, have affected your capacity to make sound judgement within your decision making behaviour. However Mr Casey accepted that it is that combination, and in particular the significant drug use at the time of this offending, which has led you to make impulsive and self-destructive decisions.
69Having said that Verdins does not apply, your mental health history, both from your formative years, and any impact of the July 2022 accident, is obviously relevant more broadly to my assessment of your moral culpability, whether you are an appropriate vehicle for specific deterrence, and whether general deterrence should be moderated. In my view there should be some moderation of each of those principles for the following reasons.
70First, because of the trauma and lasting effect of your family background. Although Mr Casey initially raised the question of whether The Queen vBugmy[3] is applicable in your case, in my view your background is not one that can be characterised as evidencing deprivation and neglect. The presence and support of your family members is testament to that fact.
[3]The Queen v Bugmy (2013) 249 CLR 571
71However, in my view your personal background, specifically the trauma you experienced at the hands of your father, is certainly relevant. I accept that it has fed into your development of your psychological profile and behaviours. No doubt it has fed into your disengagement with both family and school structures, which in turn led to your anti-social peer associations and eventually your drug use. Equal justice dictates that I must take those matters into account. That is, the sentence I impose on you will be different to that for a person who had the benefit of a stable and peaceful upbringing.
72Second, I accept generally that there is a correlation between violence experienced as a child and violence exhibited as an adult. I accept that there can be a correlation between that trauma and the development of PTSD and potentially of bipolar disorder. According to Mr Albassit, although he does not diagnose those conditions, he certainly states you exhibit symptomology consistent with both of those conditions.
73Third, I accept that struggles with emotional regulation, manic moods, self-destructive behaviours and impulsivity can be – and in your case are – part of your presentation, and in turn have fed into your development of a significant maladaptive pattern of substance abuse, recklessness and poor judgement.
74Those patterns were already in place before the car accident of July 2022, as demonstrated by your already chronic drug use, and by your prior criminal offending. That offending was limited to three appearances across 2021 and related to driving matters in the main, resulting in non-conviction undertakings. As such I accept this offending represents an escalation.
75Those matters are all factors which work to mitigate your sentence. Your moral culpability and suitability as a vehicle of specific deterrence should be moderated as against a person who has not suffered any of those features in their formative years. Adding to those matters is the sequalae stemming from your car accident which occurred not long before this offending.
76There is no suggestion on the material that your cognition is impaired as a result of your brain injury. I enquired of counsel whether they would seek a psychiatric assessment, or neuropsychological assessment regarding your traumatic brain injury, or whether they were satisfied on the available material that I was in a position to sentence you. Mr Casey confirmed that a psychiatric assessment would not be sought given the report of Mr Albassit, along with the discharge summary notes of the neuropsychological assessment performed in 2022. As I indicated, and I should note, that Mr Albassit did not refer to cognitive issues stemming from your car accident.
Family support
77I do note that your family say your drug use increased after your accident as you felt ‘empty and dead’ and had no purpose. Your sister describes you in that way as spiralling. She says you were on heavy drugs to deal with how you were feeling. As I understand it Mr Casey accepts the sequalae from your accident is relevant in explaining your escalation in drug use, and I have taken it into account in that way.
78You are well supported by many members of your family. There is a stated intention on the part of your family to follow up with a neurologist and psychologist on your release from custody. There is consideration being given to an an application for NDIS support package.
79Your family state you are a different person when not on drugs – kind, respectful, and helpful. Their references also attest to your regret for this offending. They say you are shocked at your behaviour, and when on bail you were fighting to improve yourself.
Remorse and Plea of Guilty
80Your expressions of remorse are also outlined by Mr Albassit. You were able to express empathy and understanding for the fear your victim must have felt.
81Your remorse is also demonstrated by your early plea of guilty. You are entitled to the benefit of your plea. It has a utilitarian benefit in that it saves the court and the community the cost of a trial. It also saves the victim from reliving her traumatic experience.
82A plea of guilty also entitles you to a discount where it is a genuine expression of remorse. I accept that it is. That bodes well for your rehabilitation and your future.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
83I also accept that you have demonstrated some efforts towards rehabilitation by way of your engagement with Mr Watkins. Mr Albassit has drawn up a comprehensive suite of recommendations for your future rehabilitation, both via mental health treatment and drug and alcohol treatment. I commend those recommendations to anyone working with you in the future.
84I take into account that you are still a young man, 24 at the time of offending and 26 years old now. Rehabilitation must be a focus in sentencing any young offender. Your sister states, “I firmly believe that my brother has the potential to overcome his challenges and contribute positively to society”. Your brother says, “I believe that with the right help, he can turn things around and do good things… we’re doing our best to support him and get him the help that he needs… Mustafa knows he’s made mistakes and really wants to fix them”.
85The community has an interest in reclaiming you. In my view your prospects of rehabilitation are somewhat guarded. If you can resist illicit drug use then they should be very positive. You have support and love of your family around you.
86To that end, while accepting that a head sentence and non-parole period is warranted for your offending, Mr Casey submitted that I should order a shorter than usual non-parole period to allow for your rehabilitation. I did not understand that submission to be disputed by Mr Fryar on behalf of the prosecution. In my view it is a sensible submission given your age, your personal circumstances and recent history, the need for supervision on your release and your prospects of rehabilitation.
Current Sentencing Practices and Totality
87I have had regard to current sentencing practices for this type of offending, having been assisted by counsel in their submissions and by a number of cases referred to by Mr Casey. As always there are similarities and differences between both offending and offender. Ultimately I am required to impose a just sentence in all the circumstances before me and that is what I have endeavoured to do.
88I have also taken into account totality. The base sentence will be for the carjacking offence which is the most serious here. There is a need to reflect separate incidents of offending by way of some cumulation on that base sentence, however I must then stand back and assess the overall sentence to ensure that it is appropriate.
Sentence
89Mr Al-Fuaadi, the sentence I impose will be as follows.
90On Charge 1, of property damage, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.
91On Charge 2, of property damage, you are convicted and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.
92On Charge 3, of carjacking, you are convicted and sentenced to two years and two months' imprisonment.
93On Charge 4, of possessing an unregistered Category A longarm, you are convicted and sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
94On Charge 5, of possessing a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine, you are convicted and sentenced to seven days' imprisonment.
95On Charge 6, of trafficking in a drug of dependence, you are convicted and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
96On Charge 7, possession of a drug of dependence, namely cannabis, along with Summary Charge 14, possession of a controlled weapon, namely the flip knife, and Summary Charge 22, possession of cartridge ammunition, you are convicted and fined an aggregate fine for those three charges of $500.
97In relation to Summary Charge 15, driving while disqualified, you are convicted and sentenced to two months' imprisonment.
98On Summary Charge 20, of possess a prohibited weapon, namely the machete, you are convicted and sentenced to one month imprisonment.
99On Summary Charge 21, possession of a prohibited weapon, namely the Taser, you are convicted and sentenced to seven days' imprisonment.
100On Summary Charge 23, refusal to provide passcodes to police, you are convicted and sentenced to one month imprisonment.
101The sentence imposed on Charge 3, the carjacking, is the base sentence. I make the following orders for cumulation. Three months of Charge 1, three months of Charge 2, one month of Charge 4, two months of Charge 6, one month of Summary Charge 15, and seven days of Summary Charge 23, are to be served cumulatively upon the base sentence and upon each other.
102The total effective sentence that produces is three years and seven days' imprisonment. I direct that you are to serve a minimum of 20 months' imprisonment before becoming eligible for parole. I direct that you have served 381 days' imprisonment, and that that term should be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
103Further, I direct that pursuant to s6AAA but for your plea of guilty to these matters, the total sentence I would have imposed would have been one of four years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and six months' imprisonment.
104In relation to the carjacking offence, there is mandatory disqualification of your driver's licence. The term imposed in relation to that is two years' disqualification, and that will be from the date of the incident.
105By consent I make the orders for compensation, for forfeiture, and for disposal.
106Are there any matters to raise, counsel? I will just ask you both to check those figures.
107MR FRYAR: Your Honour, my instructor has told me there has been missed sentence for Summary Charge 11. The figures and orders are otherwise correct.
108HER HONOUR: Summary Charge 11, which charge was that, Mr Fryar?
109MR FRYAR: Fail to give name and address after the carjacking.
110HER HONOUR: After the carjacking?
111MR FRYAR: Yes.
112HER HONOUR: Thanks to your instructor for picking that up. Given that is part of the circumstances really in relation to the carjacking, I am going to make that sentence entirely cumulative. Mr Al-Fuaadi, in relation to Summary Charge 11, your failure to give name and address after the accident, you are convicted and sentenced to seven days' imprisonment. That sentence will be concurrent with the remaining sentence, so it does not affect the total that I have already read out.
113Are there any other matters, counsel?
114MR CASEY: Nothing that I can see, thank you, Your Honour.
115HER HONOUR: Thank you. I will ask my associates to give you a moment on the link with Mr Al-Fuaadi, Mr Casey, before that is turned off.
116MR CASEY: I would greatly appreciate that, thank you.
117HER HONOUR: Thanks very much, counsel, for your assistance in this matter. I will now adjourn.
- - -
0
2
0